Curtis Wanner wrote:
Charlie Clark wrote:So, the whole idea is pointless?
Personally I didn't take that from his response. There's a difference between being innovative and having a unique style.
While this is certainly not the place for an extensive debate on pictogramdesign (icon is actually being incorrectly >used in this context) there is no need to be defeatist.
Actually I believe this has been the point of the contest and the existing discussions. I believe the only defeatism is if we don't come up with guidelines because we haven't come up with something that smacks us in the head as being innovative.
2D icons with a little thickness (think suncatchers lying on a table) Photo realistic icons, possibly modified with some effect (solarized?) Darker color schemes, to be not quite so cartoon-like More pastel colors instead of vivid Framed icons with faux-3d symbols bursting through the middle Animated icons are interesting, but space concerns... Rotating 3d models of icons (!!!)
To be pedantic: there was a major shift in European 2D art with theintroduction of linear perspective in the >renaissance which is why Hieronymus Bosch's pictures are now so disturbingly enigmatic.
But you wouldn't apply it to an OS interface. It's one thing to talk about regular art and another about an OS interface which has usability constraints.
But to the matter in hand. To state that it is impossible to come up withsomething new for Haiku is both stating the >obvious as well as missing the
point. I don't think Michael is asking for an entirely new semiotic system,
simply a >recasting of the existing symbolic base in a more Haiku-centric
I disagree, Michael said he would like to see something innovative - "introducing a new idea". I don't think you even have to picky about terms to understand that innovation is MORE than just being unique or distinctive.
I think there is a lot to be said for retaining the isometric style butinfusing it with a bit more Haiku flavour but >this is certainly not the only possibility.
Again I wouldn't call this innovation, just a unique or distinctive style. As for being innovative, this would require a change in the interaction of the WIMP interface or a completely new interface itself.
Which I am not opposed to, either, but not right now. :-)
If you are picky about terms (i.e. icon, pictogram), your use of isometric isn't correct either. They actually use what is referred to as a dimetric projection or 3/4 perspective.
I did not know that. Thanks for the info.